It looks like you're enjoying the forums but haven't created an account yet. Why not take a minute to register for your own free account now? As a member you get free access to all of our forums and posts plus the ability to post your own messages, communicate directly with other members and much more. Register now!

Already a member? Login at the top of this page to stop seeing this message.

From Benitez's comments after the game, he was worried about our attacking players and made changes to try to counter that. Which struck me as weird bearing in mind the players he bought on. Diame particularly was an odd sub, I thought he'd had a good game until then. Merino was very entertaining though.

Diame had a knock I think

__________________
I quite often worry about why I love Palace so much. It can't be good for me.

I sometimes gets frustrated at the lack of subs too, but then take a step back and think; am I really going to question the methods of a bloke who has more than 42 years of football management experience, and has taken us from no points, no goals after 7 games to where we are now?

I couldn't figure out who to take off yesterday - Benny boy maybe the obvious one but although not scoring it felt like a risk replacing him 1 for 1. Wilf and Andros both were still needed - And the rest was set well.

A win would have been huge but going for it too gung ho and losing was not worth the risk IMO.

Yes, how would we have coped without Andros 'one trick' Townsend. There are people in undiscovered tribes in the Amazon who know that he'll run down the wing and cut back on his left foot 99.9% of the time. Perhaps someone should point out to him that on the one occasion he carried the ball past the full back and crossed with his right foot against West Ham it led to a goal.

Your're right he isnt. But it was pretty obvious we were not going to score yesterday. It needed new impetus or some fresh legs. My choice would have been Sorloth so we could ping some balls in to him. But what do I know.

Sir Steve Coppell always believed in picking an 11 for the entire game. Different times, admittedly, but if the team is performing - as we were in the second half - why fix what ain't broke ?

Because we had a match winner on the bench...well, not that we know he“s a match winner, but he mightve been a match winner....if he“d come off the bench to be one...or something....

__________________
Keen believer in the "Mantra of Vince Hilaires Afro"
'Is there actually any evidence of this, or is it something that's just being repeated ad nauseum on the BBS until it's considered 'fact'

Because we had a match winner on the bench...well, not that we know he“s a match winner, but he mightve been a match winner....if he“d come off the bench to be one...or something....

I think I can safely say, with no doubt at all, in absolute certainty, that if he had come off the bench to score the winning goal then he would have been a match winner who was indeed on the bench at the point before he then came on to the pitch to win the match.

I think I can safely say, with no doubt at all, in absolute certainty, that if he had come off the bench to score the winning goal then he would have been a match winner who was indeed on the bench at the point before he then came on to the pitch to win the match.

Thanks for the clarification

__________________
Keen believer in the "Mantra of Vince Hilaires Afro"
'Is there actually any evidence of this, or is it something that's just being repeated ad nauseum on the BBS until it's considered 'fact'

Roy has seen him train and made a judgement call on that. Replacing a £30m striker with a fella that was worth £300k 6 months ago, am not sure about that.

You got that half right. We paid something silly like that for him, but all season he hasn't played anywhere near that price tag. I'd gamble on £9m Sarloth to put in a better shift and if he can't hit the target from one yard, or chip a goalkeeper, then I'd question what he's doing here or why we signed him?

Except the problem is that until he comes on to the pitch to win the match, he's not a match winner. He's only a match winner once he wins the match, at which point he's no longer on the bench.

It is confusing.

But if he came on once to win a match and becomes a match winner does that title last forever or until he comes of the bench and doesn“t win the match so becomes a non match winner until he comes off the bench and wins the match next time and becomes a match winner again?

__________________
Keen believer in the "Mantra of Vince Hilaires Afro"
'Is there actually any evidence of this, or is it something that's just being repeated ad nauseum on the BBS until it's considered 'fact'

But if he came on once to win a match and becomes a match winner does that title last forever or until he comes of the bench and doesn“t win the match so becomes a non match winner until he comes off the bench and wins the match next time and becomes a match winner again?